 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Love v. State6/1/1999
or the per se prohibition, while illegal users of marijuana are. Thus, those whose marijuana use is legally sanctioned cannot be convicted merely for having metabolites of marijuana in their body fluids, while those whose marijuana use is not legally sanctioned can be.
Under the rational basis test, a legislative classification does not deny equal protection if the classification bears a direct relation to the purpose of the legislation. City of Atlanta v. Watson, supra, 267 Ga. at 187; Nix v. Long Mtn. Resources, 262 Ga. 506 (2) (422 SE2d 195) (1992). In light of the rational relationship between the statute and the legitimate state purpose of public safety (see Division 2, supra), and the fact that the effects of legally-used marijuana are indistinguishable from the effects of illegally-used marijuana, we are unable to hold that the legislative distinction between users of legal and illegal marijuana is directly related to the public safety purpose of the legislation on which we expounded in Division 2. Accordingly, we conclude that the distinction is arbitrarily drawn, and the statute is an unconstitutional denial of equal protection.
4. In light of our holding in Division 3, we need not address appellant's contention that OCGA § 40-6-391 (a)(6) violates due process of law.
Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur, except Sears, J., who concurs in the judgment only in Division 3.
Page 1 2 3 4 Georgia DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|